WWC review of this study

The Impact of Highly and Minimally Guided Discovery Instruction on Promoting the Learning of Reasoning Strategies for Basic Add-1 and Doubles Combinations

Baroody, Arthur J.; Purpura, David J.; Eiland, Michael D.; Reid, Erin E. (2015). Early Childhood Research Quarterly v30 p93-105. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED577294

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    81
     Students
    , grades
    K-2

Reviewed: August 2021

No statistically significant positive
findings
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Number and Operations outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Fluency on unpracticed doubles combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Other intervention

2 Weeks

Doubles training vs. Minimally guided practice;
53 students

0.17

0.11

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-1 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Other intervention

2 Weeks

Add-1 training vs. Minimally guided practice;
55 students

0.36

0.36

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed doubles combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Business as usual

2 Weeks

Add-1 training vs. Minimally guided practice;
55 students

0.09

0.11

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-1 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Other intervention

2 Weeks

Doubles training vs. Minimally guided practice;
53 students

0.28

0.37

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-0 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Other intervention

2 Weeks

Add-1 training vs. Minimally guided practice;
55 students

0.76

0.87

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-0 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Business as usual

2 Weeks

Doubles training vs. Minimally guided practice;
53 students

0.69

0.87

No

--
Show Supplemental Findings

Fluency on unpracticed doubles combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Intervention

2 Weeks

Doubles training vs. Add-1 training;
54 students

0.17

0.09

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-1 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Other intervention

2 Weeks

Add-1 training vs. Doubles training;
54 students

0.36

0.27

No

--

Fluency on unpracticed add-0 combinations

Guided Discovery vs. Intervention

2 Weeks

Add-1 training vs. Doubles training;
54 students

0.76

0.68

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 5% English language learners

  • Female: 48%
    Male: 52%

  • Urban
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Midwest
  • Race
    Black
    54%
    Other or unknown
    20%
    White
    26%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    5%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    95%

Setting

The study took place in three elementary schools in two school districts. Two of the schools served high risk children and one served children living in a middle class neighborhood. The schools were located in two midwestern cities in the US.

Study sample

A total of 81 students in kindergarten through second grade were included in the study. On average, student participants were 6.1 years of age. Approximately 52% of the students were male, 77% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 5% were English learners, 8% had delays in language development, and 6% had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Fifty-four percent were Black, 26% were White, and 20% had an unknown or other race category. Five percent were Hispanic or Latino and 95% were non-Hispanic or Latino.

Intervention Group

The two intervention conditions consisted of highly guided computer-based training focusing on two types of an addition practice: (1) add-1 training and (2) doubles training. Both practices involved highly guided discovery, which is well-structured and moderately explicit training with considerable scaffolding in either add-1 or doubles relations. The interventions were provided as a supplement to regular math instruction in classrooms and were delivered in two 30-minute sessions per week for 20 weeks. Instruction involved five stages of training on the computer. The main training module consisted of sequentially arranging problems (either add-1 or doubles items) to highlight a relation and to direct a child's attention to the particular relation and strategy to solve it.

Comparison Group

The comparison condition was the minimally guided practice condition. Implementation of the minimally guided practice condition consisted of engaging students in similar computer-based activities (e.g., games using a number list), which covered both add-1 and doubles strategies; however, the feedback provided to students consisted of whether a response to a problem was correct or not and did not explicitly focus on making connections to prior knowledge.

Support for implementation

Preparatory training was provided to all students to ensure that they had the computer skills necessary to benefit from the computer-based interventions.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top